Who's Leaving?

zoogs said:
Am I misremembering, or did our final recruiting fall 2 or 3 short in numbers of their initial target?
Click to expand...
In the B1G can't you only oversign by 3 going into spring to have 88/85 schollies, and then have to be down to 85 by fall? If that's the case I think we hit the number we wanted.

 
zoogs said:
Am I misremembering, or did our final recruiting fall 2 or 3 short in numbers of their initial target?
Click to expand...
They were talking about at least a couple more. To everyone else, it looked like we ended up at 88 which would be the max. But they may have already know about a couple of the departures that have been made public since then.

 
alwayshusking said:
Minnesota_husker said:
Saw someone mention that Sharp/Benning said we lose two more to get us to 81.

Obviously we can assume Bondi is one of those, but who is the other?
Click to expand...
Dwayne Johnson is a name I've heard
Click to expand...
tumblr_mfndjq0do31rn0vh6o1_250.gif


 
The Dude said:
1995 Redux said:
The Dude said:
By all accounts, Armstrong, Bush, and Darlington were the three guys the staff was looking for out of this group.

Stanton was somewhere behind Fyfe, and maybe even Broekemeier.
Click to expand...
There was just something about Bush I didn't like that I saw, something familiar.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. That doesn't mean Johnny Stanton was anywhere in the mix, though. He wasn't. Not because of a raw deal he got, but because Armstrong, Bush, and Darlington are substantially better as D1 quarterbacks.
Admittedly, that's not necessarily saying much. Heh.
Click to expand...
Granted if all 3 were at the same level with Stanton just a smidge behind it makes perfect sense he should leave and continue elsewhere. I liked his look because it was different than what we have come to expect in the last several years. The way Riley and his staff develop talent + their recruitment of him had me hopeful we could take a top level QB and actually develop/use the guy.

 
I get that, I'm just saying he would have been much more of a project than the top 3. It makes more sense to develop the guys who don't have as far to go, and have higher ceilings.

Edit: Maybe I'm just confused about what you're trying to say.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Dude said:
I get that, I'm just saying he would have been much more of a project than the top 3. It makes more sense to develop the guys who don't have as far to go, and have higher ceilings.

Edit: Maybe I'm just confused about what you're trying to say.
Click to expand...
My optimism about Stanton was because of his hype. But in the end it was just that. He unfortunately didn't pan out like I had hoped he could here. He didn't fit the mold like a lot of the other guys we have seen which I liked. Maybe that's why he didn't get developed properly. If I had one gripe about him it would be his low flying passes in his HS highlights. A tall college corner could have a big day against that. I assume this is where the accuracy problems came in. Bo and company develop good secondaries and probably recognized this problem and told him to adjust a higher thrown ball which ultimately led to him over throwing his targets. Poor coaching led to poor development. That's my assumption anyway and that's why I say "raw deal".

Now Bush I'm not a huge fan of, hopefully he can develop more and become a more consistent player that will contribute. Fyfe has the ceiling of formidable backup so really counting him above Stanton is just saying one spot is spoken for. Broekmeir (spelling) looked like he could be a contender under the new staffs tutelage. And obviously TA is the starter. Darlignton showed me the most promise but the injuries are there like a black eye. So in the end yeah Stanton had a hell of a mountain to climb to even see backup duty, I can't deny that. I just liked the possibilities he offered and wish him luck at the next stop.

 
Stanton's high school highlights weren't that impressive IMO (hurt Sr year I know). Just didn't scream 4 star. Compared to the tapes of guys like Jamal Turner, Brion Carnes, and Darlington's Jr year film, Stanton's looks like JV.

But it's only a highlight tape so it probably doesn't mean jack anyway.

 
1995 Redux said:
The Dude said:
I get that, I'm just saying he would have been much more of a project than the top 3. It makes more sense to develop the guys who don't have as far to go, and have higher ceilings.

Edit: Maybe I'm just confused about what you're trying to say.
Click to expand...
My optimism about Stanton was because of his hype. But in the end it was just that. He unfortunately didn't pan out like I had hoped he could here. He didn't fit the mold like a lot of the other guys we have seen which I liked. Maybe that's why he didn't get developed properly. If I had one gripe about him it would be his low flying passes in his HS highlights. A tall college corner could have a big day against that. I assume this is where the accuracy problems came in. Bo and company develop good secondaries and probably recognized this problem and told him to adjust a higher thrown ball which ultimately led to him over throwing his targets. Poor coaching led to poor development. That's my assumption anyway and that's why I say "raw deal".

Now Bush I'm not a huge fan of, hopefully he can develop more and become a more consistent player that will contribute. Fyfe has the ceiling of formidable backup so really counting him above Stanton is just saying one spot is spoken for. Broekmeir (spelling) looked like he could be a contender under the new staffs tutelage. And obviously TA is the starter. Darlignton showed me the most promise but the injuries are there like a black eye. So in the end yeah Stanton had a hell of a mountain to climb to even see backup duty, I can't deny that. I just liked the possibilities he offered and wish him luck at the next stop.
Click to expand...
I'm not ruling out Bush and/or Darlington get passed by when Wilson and O'Brien show up.
 
Back
Top